Westie

HD - enough already. I'm green with envy.

Congratulations, G-C. Make the most of these great times. He'll grow up quicker than you can say "What, you want another £10?".

I dream of the time when I can get up, go out and spend a day shooting. But my girls just give me too much reason not to.... That said, it doesn't prevent me from dreaming about taking photos. Or more realistically, buying equipment to take photos with. Sigh.

Look forward to seeing more of the same soon, HD. Good trip, I take it...

18-70mm is AF-S, so no problems there. It's what I use on my Nikon and given its cost, it's a fine lens - even got a weather seal on it, which is normally saved for the pro glass. As a variable aperature lens (3.5-4.5), it 'aint bad at all. Some rate it as good as the fabled 17-55mm, when stopped down. A bloody good lens to go with a d40 and if you look on fleabay, you could get a bargain. It'll knock the socks off most of the recent consumer lenses from Nikon. Trouble with me is that I'm deperate to get the 17-55. I'm just a tackle tart, though.

I'm too paranoid to take my gear out when it's blowing a gale... There are some good opportunities, especially on the coast, but get a soaking from a rogue wave - you'll dry out quick enough, but it's about the worst thing you could do for your camera. Have you thought about taking shots from inside your car, with open window? Plenty of support in a motor to steady things up. If you were nifty enough, you could get a tripod set up. LOL. Don't know what you'd say to the old plod if they turned up asking questions.

Hi Ollie I'm a Nikon guy too. D40 / D40x is bound to be a good camera - one thing to watch out for is the lenses that you can use with it - a bit more limited than some of the other Nikon bodies, but not a problem. Some lenses rely on a screw mechanism driven by the camera body itself to autofocus. As far as I know, the D40 / D40x don't 'fit' with those types of lenses (screw type), so you have to look for lenses with AF-S (Nikon) or HSM (Sigma). Not all Nikon/Sigma/Tokina/Tamron lenses will be compatible with that body. I think there may be a handy list somewhere of lenses that do fit the D40 - only of relevance if you think that you may get a tad of "lens lust" in the future. You'll still be able to find one that fits your needs, but you may have a smaller number to choose from. That's not necessarily a bad thing. I'll try to dig out a list. Whichever way you go, enjoy it. It's been the single best investment I've made in years. I'm pretty much addicted to photography now, helped along in no small way by the guys and gals on this forum. Westie.

HB - is that with a camera, or a gun?

Entry No. 3 ------------ Form & function -------------------- Camera Model: NIKON D200 Date/Time: 2008:01:27 13:55:11 Resolution: 536 x 800 Color/bw: Black and white Flash Used: No Focal Length: 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157... Exposure Time: 0.625 s Aperture: f/13.0 ISO Equiv.: 100 Whitebalance: Auto Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: Manual Exposure Mode: Manual Exposure Mode: Auto bracketing

Entry No. 2 ------------- Billy goat gruff ------------------ Camera Model: NIKON D200 Date/Time: 2008:01:26 11:48:41 Resolution: 604 x 800 Flash Used: No Focal Length: 70.0mm (35mm equivalent: 105m... Exposure Time: 0.0050 s (1/200) Aperture: f/7.1 ISO Equiv.: 100 Whitebalance: Auto Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: program (auto)

Good stuff??

Entry #1 --------- Time goes by, so slowly -------------------------- Camera Make: NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model: NIKON D200 Date/Time: 2008:01:20 20:06:51 Resolution: 800 x 533 Flash Used: No Focal Length: 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157... Exposure Time: 5.000 s Aperture: f/18.0 ISO Equiv.: 100 Whitebalance: Manual Light Source: Incandescent Metering Mode: spot Exposure: Manual Exposure Mode: Manual Exposure Mode: Auto bracketing

SW That's one of the most heart warming posts I've read in a long time. Good choice, and good luck. With everything. You've got a sound foundation there - look after the things that are dearest to you. The rest falls into place naturally. Enjoy life. There's only one chance to do that. Back on to the lenses. I've been working my tail off this lat week, so not had a chance to look in recently. The 70-300 VR that you've got gets very good reviews. In the 70-200 range, in good light, it's not so far off the stellar beast that is the 70-200 VR f2.8. Sure, there is something to be said for the 'pro' glass. It is renowned as a magical lens. But it costs £1100 and weights 2.5lb. I think you have one of the best 'prosumer' long zoom lenses made with the 70-300 VR. Don't change that. The 18-200 is a magical walkaround lens from what I hear. It won't give you the high shutter speeds in low/bad light or to freeze fast action in anything but great light, but other than that, I think it suits your purpose to a T. Post pictures, soon, and good luck with the D80. I have a D200, but I understand that the D80 is better than the D200 when it comes to high ISO pictures. Whatever your choice, you will have fun. And isn't that what photography is all about? Take it easy. Andy

Web site for on-line petition is down. I guess the police may see an 80-200mm as an offensive weapon. LOL. PS the link is ok now

Hiya SW - unfortunately VR (or OS) is only good at removing the old hand shake. It can't completely make up for movement, especially when on a boat. For that, you need a faster bit of glass than the VR/OS lenses you have been looking at. If you can get an f2.8 of some description, that will probably be better than VR/OS in low light and/or when you need a higher shutter speed to freeze movement. Most important - what sort of focal length might be useful and what is the budget? That would be useful to know in terms of what options might be best. For general purpose stuff, though, the super zooms that you're talking about will give you a great deal of flexibility, but not necessarily sort out situations with low light/movement of subject matter. I guess your looking at a max aperature of 3.5-5.6 depending on focal length with an 18-200 VR/OS type lens. A teleconverter with that would be difficult in all but very good light. Let me know what lenses you currently have and what focal ranges you thing you are missing or would be most important for your purpose. Cheers, Andy.

Congratulations, SW. A lovely picture and worthy winner. Well done to all involved. A fantastic response in the voting, too.

Hiya JK. Happy New Year to you. Hope you're keeping well. I'd go for the 300 f2.8, mainly because I'd use it for wildlife shots, I think. I can see how the zoom would be useful, but I'd just be wary of f5.6 at the wide end - could be a booger in bad/low light and might need to be stopped down more to get sharp results, although I'm guessing on that one. With the f2.8, I'd bet you'd be razor sharp by f5.6. Also depends if you are likely to be taking any action shots, although with good light, you should still be ok even at f5.6. It all depends on what you think you'll be using the lens for - if it's low light or action shots, f2.8 would be the way I would go, even though I'd be compromised by the fixed focal length. Also, with f2.8, you could add a teleconverter of say 1.4x and get even greater zoom, without too much loss in quality, at a pinch. Horses for courses, though. Have fun making an enviable decision, you lucky sod.

Cheers HB. That was a very helpful practical example. 2008 - will have one of these bad boys. Hopefully strapped to a 17-55 f2.8. If I can convince Sharon (again) that it makes the pictures of Pip look a little more crisp. She tells me that if I stop drinking, I may get a better handholding technique. Gotta love her for getting the technique/equipment argument soooo right, soooo quickly. Curse her.

Not a great deal more I can add to the sentiments shared here. Have a good break everyone and here's to some stunning shots in 2008.

Entry No. 2 ---------------- Red Ice -------------- Taken With: NIKON CORPORATION NIKON D200 File Size: 449 kb - 800x536 Taken On: 2007:12:22 14:04:56 Date/Time: 2007:12:22 14:04:56 Resolution: 800 x 536 Flash Used: No Focal Length: 105.0mm (35mm equivalent: 157... Exposure Time: 0.125 s (1/8) Aperture: f/7.1 ISO Equiv.: 110 Whitebalance: Auto Metering Mode: matrix Exposure: Manual

Well done, Mick. A cracking picture and a fitting start to the new format comp. I would love to have such a range of colours like that when I get to the coast. The sea around my way has more of a 'hot chocolate' vibe to it. It's all shades of beige. Well done to all involved. I'm looking forward to see how we can, collectively, make Mick's life a living nightmare when he come to judge. Let's see if we can break the magic 60 pictures mark! Trying to find time when there is decent available light is the hardest part at the moment. I'm waking up in darkness and going home in darkness. Boo hiss.

Nothing in the rules that prevents that, I believe.

NJ - Picture #1 is a peach of a shot. Nice one!

I can't add more to what's already been said. December is going to be a challenging month photo wise. Its grim up here at the moment. Still, white balance shouldn't be a problem, because the sky has been a lovely mid grey for the last week. I'm praying for a waterproof camera for Crimbo. Lets get some good shots in there, girls & guys. PS Hatton to win in the 8th.

NurseJ - you've done an extremely difficult job very well. I would be very disappointed if you decided not to contribute to December's comp because of this. In one comp that I had to judge, I had to toss a coin between two entries that I felt equally deserved to be in the final three. It shows that the standard is that good. I'd be interested to hear of a better, more 'objective' way of having to make a decision, in circumstances where the quality of photos to go into the final melting pot are such that you cannot decided that one picture deserves to go in over another. There is, quite simply, no other way to do it. I'd have done (and have done) the very same thing myself, if I considered that I could not choose one over another. This is a 'fun' comp. The whole idea of this format is to encourage more and more entries. To get people who have not entered before to become involved. So lets do that, huh? Judy - good job, well done. Rant over.